Model comparison
Gemma 2 9B vs GLM-4.6V
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 9B scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.6V in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where GLM-4.6V leads 38.0 to 9.7.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | |
| Noometry Index | 25.9 | 41.3 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | 2025-12-08 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.90 |
| Results tracked | 35 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6V leads
Gemma 2 9B: 29.4 (#304), GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1173 | 1390 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 34.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 22.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.6% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
Gemma 2 9B: 15.9 (#309), GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1171 | 1368 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 15.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 36.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.83 | — |
| LiveBench | 28.7% | — |
| PIQA | 83.7% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: 9.9 (#318), GLM-4.6V: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 19.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1183 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 21% | — |
| GSM8K | 84.9% | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.6V leads
Gemma 2 9B: 9.7 (#305), GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1147 | 1371 |
| GPQA Diamond | 27.5% | — |
| BoolQ | 85.7% | — |
| MMLU | 72.1% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemma 2 9B: —, GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1164 |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
Gemma 2 9B: 36.6 (#238), GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1188 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1185 | 1425 |
| LMArena Russian | 1200 | 1340 |
| LMArena French | 1190 | — |
| LMArena German | 1186 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1144 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1137 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1200 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6V leads
Gemma 2 9B: 57.6 (#269), GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1178 | 1352 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 52.6% | — |
Long Context GLM-4.6V leads
Gemma 2 9B: 36.3 (#233), GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1197 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
Gemma 2 9B: 32.1 (#281), GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 9B | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1207 | 1377 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1206 | 1347 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1193 | 1360 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 841 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 25.5% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 9B better than GLM-4.6V?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 25.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 9B or GLM-4.6V better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.9 versus 29.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 9B and GLM-4.6V share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 9B has 35 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.